Home Case Index All Cases VAT and Sales Tax VAT and Sales Tax + HC VAT and Sales Tax - 2022 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 981 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURTInterpretation of statute - notification No.FD 116 CSI 2006 (9) dated 31.03.2006 vis-a-vis the notification dated 09.10.2013 issued by the office of the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Karnataka) - documents necessarily required to accompany the goods - Levy of penalty - transportation of Spectrum Analyzer without being accompanied by e-sugam as prescribed under the Notification dated 09.10.2013 - Whether the Tribunal has erred in holding that the Spectrum Analyzer is a product without examining the question as to whether the said goods are electronic goods or not falling within the scope of the notification dated 09.10.2013? HELD THAT:- Indisputably, by virtue of the notification dated 31.03.2006, the Spectrum Analyzer is classified under Entry No.53 of the III schedule to the Act. IT products do not find a place in the notification dated 09.10.2013. However, an endeavor has been made by the department to bring this Spectrum Analyzer under the category of ‘electronic goods of all kinds’ to levy penalty under Section 53(12) of the Act for non compliance of accompanying the e-sugam along with the goods carried in the goods vehicle. This exercise of the Revenue certainly runs counter to the FD notification dated 31.03.2006. The Spectrum Analyzer having classified as IT product in terms of the said notification ought not to have been brought under the Entry 13 - ‘electronic goods of all kinds’ as per the notification dated 09.10.2013 by the Revenue to levy penalty under Section 53(12). Even otherwise, it is not in dispute that the assessee has subsequently raised esugam and produced the same along with the reply. The Tribunal has rightly analyzed the matzerial facts and arrived at a conclusion that the Spectrum Analyzer being an IT product, included under the notification dated 31.03.2006, the department ought not to have insisted for e-sugam to be accompanied with the goods moving in the goods vehicle. There are no irregularity or perversity being found with the order impugned, the same deserves to be confirmed - Sales Tax Revision Petition stands dismissed.
|